Saturday December 2, 1967 -- Yakima, Washington - AP -- Roger Patterson, 34, the man who said he photographed an abominable snowman in the mountains of northern California this fall has been charged with grand larceny involving a 16mm movie camera.

Patterson pleaded not guilty to the charge in Yakima County Superior Court and was released on his personal recognizance.

Harold Mattson, general manager of the Yakima Camera Shop, said Patterson rented the camera on May 13, 1967 and was to return it two days later.

Patterson showed a 20-second film of a large, hairy animal to a groups of scientists and reporters in Vancouver October 26, (1967). He said it showed a Sasquatch he had seen about 100 miles northeast of Eureka, California.

The viewers remained largely unconvinced.
- ---
Commentary:
The news article is referring to the showing at UBC for scientists that John Green arranged. The conflict in the story given to the public is the length of the original film. Most of the documentation for the "run time" for the Patty "look-back" sequences were 20-30 seconds in duration. The first showing at Al DeAtley's house on October 22nd was 30 seconds. The showing at UBC for the scientists the following Thursday October 26, 1967 was also 30 seconds long. The Newark Advocate newspaper reported Rene Dahinden and John Green bought the "Canadian Rights" to a 30-second piece of film from Roger Patterson 8 weeks after it was shot for $1500.00. Peter Byrne stated in a letter that his copy of the Patterson film, obtained directly from Roger Patterson, was approximately 20-30 seconds in duration. You will remember that Patterson ran out of film and stated that he only filmed 29 feet of 16mm film. If that is true, and 20-30 seconds or 29 feet is all Patterson filmed, then how is it that today's copies run 50-seconds? Where did the extra 20 seconds or more of film footage come from after Patterson died and who was the cameraman? It may not seem a significant point, but if this short piece of footage was tampered with, and the splicing is evidence that it was... why are there so many splices and edits in such a short piece of footage? What was cut out and what was added to lengthen the original projection run-time? ...Bobbie Short 2007

Back to Stories
Back to Bigfoot Encounters Main page
Back to Newspaper & Magazine Articles
Back to Bigfoot Encounters "What's New" page

Portions of this website are reprinted and sometimes edited to fit the standards
of this website under the Fair Use Doctrine of International Copyright Law
as educational material without benefit of financial gain.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html